About your Search

20110701
20110731
STATION
CSPAN 10
LANGUAGE
English 13
Search Results 0 to 12 of about 13 (some duplicates have been removed)
in afghanistan and pakistan. not later than 120 days after enactment of this act, the entity described in subsection 8, shall submit to the president and the congress, a report. sense of congress, it is the sense of congress that the entity should be modeled on the iraq study group. section 8127, not more than $200 million may be expended -- the chair: for what purpose does the gentleman from texas rise. mr. carter: i have an amendment at the desk. the chair: the clerk will report the amendment. the clerk: amendment number 31 printed in the congressional record offered by mr. carter of texas. strike lines 6 through 9 relating to military musical units. the chair: the gentleman from texas is recognized for five minutes. mr. carter: i rise to address an issue i think is very important to the patriotic men and women who fight and defend our country. representative mccollum, in good graces, asked that we restrict the military band funding by $120 million and in an attempt to help with the savings. but the congressional budget office has informed us that this reduction, this $120 million re
it comes to discussing the merits of continuing our efforts in afghanistan, the republicans clamor to defend it despite our fiscal mess. i want to remind my republican friends the situation we are in now is not new. throughout history from rome to the ottoman empire to the soviet union the over extension of military and protracted struggles in foreign countries has crippled empires. some historians have credited ronald reagan for the soviet union's collapse but what really bankrupted the soviet union was its wars, just like us, they paid a crushing price both financially and morally in afghanistan. overextending geopolitically comes at a cost over time in any nation that thinks otherwise is setting itself up to repeat the mistakes of the past. as of today, the united states has spent more than 2 1/2 times the percentage of g.d.p. on afghanistan that the -- than the soviet union spent on its g.d.p. during its nine-year war in afghanistan. public polls are clear, americans know the cost of the war in afghanistan is unsustainable and want us to withdraw as soon as possible. when it co
university professor. after this break, we will talk more politics and legislation and afghanistan with our roundtable, conn carroll and jamelle bouie. be right back. ♪ >> monday on c-span, the dali lama -- dalai lama and martin luther king, jr.'s speechwriter. they spoke about a number of topics, including the death penalty. >> the number of people who kill through violence -- are killed through violence, over 200 million. but problem not solved. i think that people lay down a seed of hatred. >> watch this discussion monday at 6:30 p.m. eastern on c-span. >> monday night on c-span, look back at president nixon's foreign policy. members of his administration and the president's son-in-law discuss topics including communism in china, invading north vietnam, and the 1967 war in the middle east. >> the discussion then in the newspapers were nixon's secret plan for peace. what was it? of course, he never talked about it. that was rockefeller pushing nixon to say something, to expose what his plan was. rockefeller did not think that nixon had a plan. he comes in after a hard day of campaigning
in afghanistan and iraq and not really cutting the deficit. we're boring 40 cents on the dollar for every dollar that we spend in washington. and we cannot keep doing this. one thing i like to see is the repeal of obamacare. that alone would save us $2.5 trillion in the next 10 years. as far as the reid plan, i like to see him get it through the senate. i did not think that it would pass. host: couple we go to an independent in michigan, here is what the "new york times calls " says this morning. go ahead. caller: i called my representative yesterday and asked him to work with the president to compromise and make sure that the debt ceiling is raised over into 2013. this is destroying our economy. host: where do you see compromise? caller: th reid plan has cuts and take this off the table until 2013. i think that that makes sense. host: so you do not agree with republicans on this. caller: i do not. there is trillions of dollars being cut. let's take this and we don't want to make this something that the rest of the world is going to use against us. our dollar is worth nothing in the last 10 year
every month for military operations in afghanistan alone to prop up a corrupt and incompetent karzai government. how about ending wasteful subsidies to big agriculture companies? how about asking billionaire hedge fund managers to pay the same tax rates as their secretaries? the truth is that the best way to deal with our long-term fiscal situation is to grow our economy. that means creating jobs and putting people back to work. the last election i thought was about jobs. we haven't talked about jobs at all since the new republican majority became -- came to power. that means investing in things like education and infrastructure and green technology and medical research. that's the kind of economic future the american people deserve. the boehner default plan would take us exactly in the wrong direction and urge my colleagues on both sides of the aisle to reject it. i yield back the balance of my time. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman yields back the balance of his time. the gentleman from california has 5 1/2 minutes remaining. the gentleman is recognized. mr. dreier: mr
of other members of congress, there were warlords from the northern alliance of afghanistan that wanted to meet with us because we were told that the administration didn't want to meet with them and after we met with them it was clear why the administration wouldn't want to. now, i was not aware and it was during the bush administration, of course, our initial actions in afghanistan, we sent in intelligence, we sent in special forces, we sent in weaponry, we equipped the northern alliance tribes who had a special personal interest in defeating the taliban. and afghanistan as a whole had seen how evil the taliban was. how much damage they could do to society as they burned paintings and books and films and totally suppressed freedom in afghanistan. they knew. these people were evil but they were afraid of them but with the united states weaponry, with our guidance and intelligence training these people defeated the taliban. what i was not aware of until we met with these folks and turns out i could have been aware, i just was not, but do you the research, you find out, the bush administr
,000 to afghanistan so we can spend dollars a gallon on gasoline of afghan people spend a dollar and 20 -- $1.20. it is ridiculous what we allow these people to get away with. and how many people -- i think there is 37% of this nation that consider themselves republicans now. i just can't believe there are that many stupid people in this nation. have a nice day, susan b. host: thank you. a headline in "the wall street journal." sara lee and janet hook. one note -- investors in u.s. treasuries are not betting a major deal will solve the u.s. debt situation. a tweet from peter hogan -- >> is clarksburg, west virginia. dispensed -- next is clarksburg, west virginia. spence. caller: i would like to say united we stand and divided we fall and we need to apply it to the government. we need to start with congress eliminating their little perks. some of the benefits we give to congress -- and the military men, paying them what they do, benefits for life, but when these clowns of their retired they carry a lifetime package with them. if we want to talk about deficit cuts, maybe we can close some of th
down the cost of our military efforts in afghanistan and iraq. last year we spent a little over $150 billion. this year we'll spend a little over $100 billion. and the plan is to soon be down to at least $50 billion in two or three years. so over the ten-year period there'll be about eight years at nearly $50 billion or so spent on the war instead of $150 billion. that's part of thelan that we've been operating on for a long time. $150 billion for the w is not baseline expenditure of the united states. it was never projected to continue at that level, so hopefully we could bring it below $50 billion. maybe we went get to $50 billion. i don't know. but what is the reasonable estimate? i think the house republicans and the president said it would drop to $50 billion, and that would be the baseline out there for the rest of the time. that's $1 trillion. that's $1 trillion. so you take $1 trillion out of the $2.7 trillion, you're down to $1.7 trlion. and another thing that's scored in tt, since that $1 trillion in war costs is scored the way mr. reid scored that, which is phantom money,
in afghanistan and i spoke to a very senior norwegian government official and he described the man as a neonazi and they are finding it very difficult to believe this was just his work alone. this was a very sophisticated and coordinated attack, and in addition to the shooting, they think maybe two or three bombs in the city center and powerful bombs. the truck bomb from the building and friends i talked to in oslo say the radius went out to 1,000 meters that windows were sheeterred and they believe there was a second bomb not baitsment of the building where the prime minister's office was so very sophisticated and well coordinated attack. >>clayton: an attempt to assassinate the prime minister there who was expected to give a talk, today, at the youth camp where we hear reports that there could have been other bomb materials found at the catch, as well. when you talk about "naive." what do you mean? >>guest: very good and humble "for my people" and one of the best allies we have, but a very humble people. they have supported peace. that is home of the nobel peace prize and they never thought a
withdrawal of troops in afghanistan is not something you share with the taliban. they don't have watches but do have calendars. they know what the implications are. he's made monumental errors internationally and errors defensively. and up to a prem p premise. >> sean: you say in the beginning he focused on the wrong things. you said from the time he took office he focused on the wrong things. if you were elected in 2008, and had been elected and saying the worst economy since the great depression what would you have done? >> well, his first job had to be to get this economy going. and had to stop the decline and that is what the first job should have been. he delegated it over to nancy pelosi and harry read. they cracked a new spending program protecting union jobs for government owe workers but didn't create the kind of opportunities needed in the private sector. then, he went to obama care, cap and trade, and card checks, stacking national labor relations board. one thing after another. liberal agenda he'd been pining for for years, he put in place. and the impact could have been pred
of every six department of defense dollars is going to afghanistan. we got the taliban out of power. karzai stood for free elections in 2004. al qaeda was dismantled and sent into western pakistan. this is not a nation-building exercise. this is a counter-terror exercise. we do not need 100,000 troops on the ground of the cost we're paying today in order to get the job done. [applause] thank you. i am here to tell you the future of the united states is not going to be determined in the prairies of afghanistan. the future of the united states is going to be determined by how well-prepared we are to compete in a highly competitive 21st century. that battle will be waged across the pacific ocean. we have some work to do. as you walk out of this building, i want you to remember why we're in this race. it is because it is about the generation and we're about to pass the country to and the condition in which they will find it. my priorities will be debt and spending. we have no choice. trajectory we're on is unsustainable. launching a new industrial revolution is within our grasp. it has happened
not be able to do things militarily to support our troops in afghanistan and iraq. i view this, i think it bears close watching, but there is a perception that somehow we're giving our china, india, brazil and other countries an advantage. i view this program as a two-way street. it does provide a degree of access to american companies and so i would be also reluctant -- i reluctantly oppose your amendment but i can assure you that both of us feel very strongly that it bears watching. it has borne some fruit. mr. frelinghuysen: it's not money wasted, it's not money given away to competitors. thank you for yielding. mr. visclosky: but again, i think it draws attention that we should be closely monitoring these funds. i yield back. the chair: the gentleman yields back. for what purpose does the gentleman from fey rise? >> i move to strike the last word. the chair: the gentleman is recognized. mr. broun: i'd like to yield to dr. harris from maryland. mr. harris: let me briefly address this so we can move on. we only cut $6 million out of the $8 million. there's budget language further on t
Search Results 0 to 12 of about 13 (some duplicates have been removed)

Terms of Use (10 Mar 2001)